Even as he continues an already lengthy stay on the free agent market, star outfielder Bryce Harper is “not signing — or even considering — short-term deals,” according to Jon Heyman of MLB Network (Twitter link).
There has been some indication of late that some clubs may be pursuing Harper on less-than-lengthy contract terms. In particular, the Giants’ entry into the market for Harper seemed to raise the prospect of such an approach. By some accounts, at least, the San Francisco organization is not only a real potential suitor but is interested only in committing to Harper for a limited term.
Just where Harper and his camp are drawing the line isn’t clear. Regardless of the guaranteed term of an eventual contract, any deal is quite likely to come with complicated opt-in/opt-out arrangements, potentially including both club and player opportunities to lengthen or shorten the deal.
The parameters remain unclear. It does seem reasonable to conclude, though, that Harper won’t be amenable to offers premised on the idea of earning a big salary now while reentering the market at a still-youthful age. That possibility may well be contemplated in a contract, as noted above, but a longer background guarantee seems to be a necessary part of the picture as well.
Presumably, that indicates that Harper believes a suitably lengthy offer is still achievable. All indications are that the Phillies would still be amenable to a major commitment, though the team’s standing offer (if any) isn’t known. It seems the Nationals have withdrawn the ten-year, $300MM offer they originally dangled, though the team’s current threshold is not clear. Other teams that remain connected to Harper include the Padres and White Sox, with a few unspecified teams still rumored to be engaged on some level.
Then he needs to get that 400 million mark out of his head
Why? Just because he hasn’t signed yet doesn’t mean he’s going to take less. Someone will sign him eventually.
Tell that to Mike Moustakas.
He’s gotta wait till manny signs
I think he was referring to last year in regards to Moustakas….
And Manny will wait until Bryce signs.
Couldn’t you point to JD Martinez (signed 2/19) and Jake Arrieta (signed 3/11) as late signors who did really well last year? Both scored AAV in the $25M range. Going back further, one of the last “monster” contracts was signed by Prince Fielder on 1/25. And that was 7 years ago before we had the really slow market of the of the past 2 years.
Holding out can sometimes burn you (Moustakas) but isn’t the worst tactic in negotiation. There are lots of examples of waiting for the market to come to you … and it does.
He’s not Mousakas clearly
But JD started the off season looking for a $200 million dollar deal. Waiting and signing did not get him what he wanted, he settled.
It at $400 million they won’t.
‘Not’
No wonder the PA doesn’t want teams offers getting out into the public. When they cry nobody is getting any money and Harper is turning down 10/300 it makes them look pretty stupid.
The PA should renegotiate the terms they fought for last CBA and ask to get rid of the harsher penalties to the luxury tax teams. That’s the only thing they should get in the next CBA. Take a step back to go forward. Also fight for a draft lottery that’s all I’ll allow them to have.
Interesting fact that is almost never discussed; Scott Boras earned over $107M in 2017. His income is higher than many teams payrolls…
Wow
Nice stat
Forbes says Boras’s earnings are down to “$105.2M” in 2018.
So he’s hurting too!
The National Football League has a rule that an agent can’t receive more than 3 percent of player salaries. The National Basketball Association places the limit at 3 percent too. Baseball has no limit on what agents can make. If I’m the players union, this is a massive point that needs to be added to the next CBA. Players deserve to take home as much of their salary as possible.
Boras pulls down ten percent of the contracts he negotiates. It’s a shame that a players are getting taken to the cleaners by their agents.
This is a fair point, however, in the NBA and NFL the salary structure is set in stone. The agents have no negotiation power, nor have very much say over their client’s contracts, which are all laid out in the CBA based on service and revenues.
Another difference is the NFL and NBA have “hard” spending caps. Teams are simply not allowed to exceed the limits put in the CBA, further reducing the freedom of the market.
I would find it hard to believe that MLBPA would demand something that in then end would set a hard cap on what any player could earn. Lebron. is a great example. He’ll never be able to get what the market would bear for him because he’ll always be limited by the “Max” deal for his service profile..
They chose those agents
Something tells me that even if 3 percent was the hard cap, Boras would still be making 9 figures a year
He has a lot of very well paid clients
CursedRangers………….Ummmmmm…the CBA does not set the terms agents can charge as the MLB has no say over agents, only the MLBPA
No one is forcing any player to sign with Boras and his rates – that’s the players choice. Just like no Team is being forced to give Harper $400mil – that’s the Team’s choice.
If Players don’t want to be “taken to the cleaners” – don’t hire agents with massive fees. It’s not rocket science. There are a multitude of agents out there who charge less than Boras – he does because he’s the most successful.
Do you really think the luxury tax is the real problem. Who does that really effect. The Red Soxwho don’t seem to care and the Yankees and the Dodgers’Other teams just use that as an excuse not to spend more. The problem is teams like the Mets or Braves or Phillies etc not paying more money based on the revenue of the team. Every other league has a hard cap and there players get paid. Thats because every team gets close to the cap.Only in baseball are teams allowed to carry ridiculously low payrolls. If players the level of Machado or Harper reached fa almost every team in other sports would be looking to sign them if they could fit them in not one or two teams.A player the level of Moustakis would be getting multiple offers.What other leagues would good players not even get offers
The NBA has a soft cap (see all the various exceptions such as mid-level and Bird) and has a luxury tax for standard/repeat offenders.
It _does_ (along with the NFL and NHL) have a salary floor (90% of the cap). This is what is sorely missing from MLB..
In NBA, one player makes big difference. In MLB, not so much.
You are so right.Its an absolute disgrace that only a handfulof teams are even trying to be competitive. And the fan base feeds into it instead of applauding teams for trying to put together good teams(Like the Yankees Red Sox and Dodgers) fans from other teams knock them instead of demanding the most from there teams.When the Mets spent money they drew 3 million plus every year.But ownership made a decision to spend less knowing they could still make plenty of money.I’m sure this is true in many other cities.Teams who are not willing to spend a decent amount of money should not be allowed in league
I question whether the CBA has anything to do with it.
The vast majority of teams wouldn’t go over the threshold even with a $30M AAV deal added to their books. Big money teams aren’t the most likely players for Harper anyway. Yankees have a loaded outfield. Same for Boston. Cubs could make room but they’re fine. Really, the Giants and Dodgers are two big money clubs that might be deterred by the tax. BUT both are rumored to be interested in Harper in a shorter, higher AAV type deal. That tells you that the tax isn’t their big concern.
Now, there are good reasons to raise the threshold. I just don’t happen to think that it would have much impact in Harper’s case. The bigger issue is that teams have finally woken up to the idea that 10 year deals rarely pan out.
Imagine a world in baseball when you could trade draft picks. When a team goes into a rebuild trading off their stars and getting prospects and extra draft picks back in the return.
Tim, it’s not really a soft cap from the player’s perspective, he’s still limited to what the CBA says he can make, regardless of true market value. Again, LeBron is great example. No matter what, his deal with the Lakers was set by the CBA, if another team wanted to pay him $50mil they could not, so it’s really a hard cap.
The reasons that caps and revenue sharing work in the NFL and NBA is the difference in revenue sharing structure. In the NBA and NFL all basketball/football related revenue (including TV deals) go into a big pot which is then divided up among the owners equally. For example, in 2017 the NFL shared almost $8 billion and each team got $255 million. MLB does not operate this way. MLB teams only contribute a certain % of their local baseball related revenue to a pot that gets re-distributed.
For this type of system to work, there has to be salary certainty and hard caps, meaning that salaries for players are set by the CBA based on service. I’m not sure that the MLBPA would ever want to give up the possibility of players being paid based on performance and not service time.
Yeah, you got a great point there. I think a lot of teams that can afford Harper and Machado just don’t want/need them, and many teams are simply buried by already bloated long-term contracts and learned their lesson. Does anyone team that has a contract like Miggy, Pujols, Heyward, Felix Hernandez, Cano, Chris Davis, want to add another? The Giants had a doozy in Bary Zito they are still hung over from. I think insane analytics have taken hold and teams can see the damage having a 10-year deal can deter success. Take those teams out and that’s quite a few big clubs right there.
So you have the Yankees who now have their own albatross contract in Stanton and are stacked already. Boston doesn’t even have room for either, they are so stacked. The Cubs have three or four bad deals already on their books. The Giants are retooling. The Dodgers signed Pollack instead of Harper, probably because they are terrified of the 10-year commitment.
So now you’re limited and you get offers. The Nationals offered $300 million to Harper and were turned down. The White Sox offered Machado somewhere around $200 million and were turned down. I can’t feel sorry for either player when they are looking for offers that won’t get there until they realize there isn’t a lot of competition.
Do you think he’s returning his commission on the Murray deal …. not.
Don’t you think its a little early to call Stantons contract an albatross.Two years ago he had 59 hrs last year he had 38 hrs. How can you predict its an albatross He’s just reaching his prime.There are many power hitters whose power actually increase as they age and he’s already a great power hitter. Jason Heywards contract is an albatross. Stanton’s lets wait and see
Keep in mind, they can choose any agent they want. Harper has chosen Boras knowing he is going to give up more.
I guess someone doesn’t like the truth. MLB does not certify agents, the MLBPA does. The test to take for certification costs $2,000.
The MLBPA does not cap % like the NFL but the average agent % runs 4-5%. Boras does not make 10% from contracts – that is hogwash.
In 2017 he had $1.9 billion in contracts and made $108.3, just do the math.
debubba…..Boras doesn’t make 10% on contracts….cursedrangers is full of it. I I stated Boras made $108.3M in 2017 on $1.9 billion in contracts
Perhaps I am speaking too soon and perhaps albatross is too harsh for him at this point. However, he’s 29 this year and here’s the payout over the next nine years.
2019: $26 million
2020: $26 million
2021: $29 million
2022: $29 million
2023: $32 million
2024: $32 million
2025: $32 million
2026: $29 million
2027: $25 million
2028: $25 million team option/$10 million buyout
I highly doubt after, say 2023 (when he’s 34) he’s going to be worth a third of what they are paying. That’s over $130 million. I hope I’m proved wrong…
Mets may be a poor example here – they were cleansed in the Ponzi scheme.
Cat – that just means he averages 6% on all current contracts that are currently active. He could easily command 10% on the Harper contract.
Lets consider that Did he earn 26 million with 38 hrs.I think maybe by the time he reaches 32 million I don’t know whether that will really be an outrageous salary. How many players in baseball doyou think are good for 40 hrs maybe more for the next 5 or 6 years.Why should I believe at the age of 34 he won’t be able to hit 35 hrs.Home run hitters tend to gain power not lose power .Beltre Cruz Aaron come to mind.My point is he might indeed be an albatross.He might also be a very good contract.I constantly hear people mocking that contract when there are so many clearly worse contracts and his contract has really not hurt either of his two teams yet. If he hits 55 hrs next year is it then an albatross.He’s surely capable of it after all he’s already hit 59 hrs when receiving 26 mill. How much was that year worth in dollars He had a 7,6 WAR.Most people conservatively go 5 or 6 million for a point of WAR so that year while earning 26 mill he was somewhere in the 38 to 45 million range. Some albatross
luclusciano….players and agents negotiate the % between themselves. Do you really believe that Harper would say…”Sure, not that I am making huge money you can take 10% after taking 5.7% for 7 years”?
I doubt the MLBPA would look kindly upon that as well.
Spending and winning doesn’t always mean the same thing look at the Astros. The problem with the MLB is how many teams rank on purpose to rebuild. Astros, Reds, Brewers, Cubs all tank or have tanked to get where they are now. The MLB needs to punish the teams who do it. One way would be a lottery style draft other ways would be the commish to block one sided trades.
Giants are looking for short term because they have to win in 3 years or less.
dmarcus I have no idea what you’re talking about .First off if they have to win in three years one response with that really old team.No way.They have no young players to build around offensively.. Aside from Rodriguez no long term answers in their pitching.Winning in 3 years not likely. Plus why for a team that’s won it all 3 times since 2010 is winning such a top priority instead of building another team by building up a farm system and trading off all there current older players for minor leaguers. Your comment really confuses me.I think maybe that’s just you saying what you want rather then what the reality with the Giants is.If you mean a winning record that’s possible .If you mean winning it all.I guess we can all dream
There isn’t a single player worth that money.
Wait 2 seasons, then Boras and Harper’s heads will explode if both Trout and betts become FA then and blow away anything the lesser player Harper could ever hope to get.
It would/will be funny to see Boras come up with excuse after excuse regarding that also.
Yes, the owners must be crazy, who wouldn’t want to commit over $300 million to a guy coming off a 1.3 WAR (B-ref) season
Mother of God… EXACTLY!
Seriously. The dude had one outlier insane season, a bunch of bad seasons and a few pretty good ones. Why would anyone want to give him more than 3-4 years.
Exactly what years were “bad”?
He was below replacement level (b ref) every other year. His 2014, 2016, and 2018 campaigns were all sub 2 WAR, his 2013 and 2017 were 3.7 and 4.7 respectively, and he had the blowout 2015 campaign. He struck out 169 times last year (career high) and has broken .300 ba in only two seasons. Career negative DRS, most of his defensive metrics are below league average at best. He’s a high-low corner infield power bat. That’s not exactly a thin market right now.
Might want to brush up on your definitions…
Replacement=O WAR
League average=2 WAR
But league average is hardly worth 300 million.
I think WedgeAnt27 has hit on the reason why teams haven’t jumped at the chance to spend $300 plus for Harper. He’s good. He’s splashy. But his game has holes. And, with only a few exceptions, many of the contracts longer than even six years have players under-performing by the end of them. This is a market thing. If Harper was as good as Trout, he’d be getting multiple offers to his liking. He has (wisely, in my view) held off signing to get the best possible sense of the market and then he’ll take the deal he wants. I think the same is largely true for Machado, too. He hurt himself with a lack of effort in crucial situations in the playoffs last season. Even with that, he’ll still get big money. Probably not quite as much as he’d like. But that’s OK. Ask for the world. Take less. No harm; no foul.
Jason Kipnis has a 2 WAR season last year. He is a cheap 14 mil and he played center last year (kind of) and played it in college. Any takers instead of Harper?
He had 3 years 1.5 WAR or lower. If there not bad lets just call them not good ((2014 2016 2018)
Because he’s not a 400 million dollar player.
He isn’t Trout – he is Harper, he isn’t worth $400m at 10y
Not at 400 million.
The problem is that he started out at his high point. He should have said he was looking for a 16 year contract at 800 Million. Have the teams work you down from there.
But then he wouldn’t have signed until opening day 2020.
Yep. None of these 8-10 year deals work out for anybody. Harper COULD be the outlier here seeing as he’s just 26. Stanton won’t end well for Yankees. The Angels with Pujols is just atrocious. He needs to be realistic.
Thats not really accurate. No 10 year deal to a guy in his early 30s has been worth it. Jeters 10 year deal and Arods first 10 year deal (assuming he hadn’t opted out) were both worth what they were paid. There just aren’t many past players in their mid 20s who signed long term deals. Pujols, Arods 2nd contract, etc are not good comparisons.
There will be no 400 Mil.just need to beat Stanton’s Contract per year not length say more like 330 Mil per yr.
Harper’s defensive liabilities will keep him under 30mil. He just plain can’t play defense, except maybe in a phone booth
he is gonna get owned! no team to play for!
MLB Players: “We’re confused why ownership won’t sign players!”
Also MLB Players: “No short term deals, we’re not signing contracts”
????
Can’t have it both ways kids. Owners have never seen a long term deal that actually works for the duration of the contract, so they’re not being idiots and handing out 10 year deals. Deal with it. It probably will not change now that we’ve got enough smart folks dealing with the front office who can show proof that signing even the best players in baseball to 10 year deals is a really really stupid idea.
This is an incorrect statement. While the majority of longterm deals haven’t worked out in their entirety, there have also been a number of contracts that have worked out just fine… Manny Ramirez, A-Rod’s first deal, Kershaw, Sabathia…. Trout’s is doing just fine as well
I think the point is that they never work out, but that it isn’t worth the risk if they don’t. Especially if I can sign you for 4 years instead of 10.
My point was just that there’s a major difference between Heyward or Crawford type deals, and some that get 5-6 years of production on a 8-10 year deal
Owners have to be more than baseball fans to stay on top financially. They also have to be risk-averse, especially since they have more to lose if things go south than the average business man.
Yes, Baseball revenues have been trending higher for quite some time now, but there are troubling warning signs on the horizon. We all know nothing goes up forever without so much as a pullback. Any minute the bubble could burst, as happens occasionally with the stock market. Baseball has had it’s pullbacks as well. We’re perhaps overdue for another.
Like erupting volcanoes and earthquakes, a recurrence is just a matter of time. The longer it’s been since the last incident, the greater the danger and the damage.
The number one principle of long-term investing is capital preservation. Signing guys to 10 year, 300MM guaranteed contracts is like putting most of your eggs in one basket, … unnecessarily risky.
(Though some would disagree)
Two of those were aided by PED’s, Trout hasn’t played out his full contract, and Keyshaw is breaking down.
*Kershaw
Manny, A rod, Papi, Bonds, all those deals worked for a distinct, PED enhanced reason.
With stricter testing the aging curves are more back to normal and player production is falling off a cliff in the mid 30s again; Papi somehow getting a free pass to roid the lone exception.
There’s some debate whether Ortiz ever actually tested positive
Ortiz was on the first list that tested positive. The only debate is Ortiz whining, and trying to say he didn’t use.
No debate about testing positive, he did. The debate was if those results would be made public.
There’s no debate that he gained tens of pounds of muscle while his head grew substantially and that he led the league in slugging at age 40.
He also publicly stated that he received his test results in the mail several times a year. You only get something mailed to you if you’re positive.
I remember when I first accused Papi of juicing I was called crazy .. dude went from hitting 8/20 hrs in MINNY never playing in more than 130 games. then he doubled his size and was able to play in 150 plus games and crank out 40/50 dingers a year.
Did you see the list? Did you see everyone’s name that was on the list? How many names were on the list that we didn’t “see”? Just because someone says they saw the list and give one name that was on the list? Show me the whole list and we have something. How do you even pretend to know that ANYONE was NOT on the list when you don’t even know the names on the list? So throw one guy under the bus because someone who supposedly saw the list says he was on it? Do we know all the names? Do we have the list? Otherwise, it’s meaningless. No, it’s beyond meaningless. There is nothing there folks. Sorry.
GOOGLE The NY Times, the NY Post, and ESPN just to name a few sources to see the names…
Must’ve been Sox fans.
Papi never received a mega deal in the same conversation of the others
BF: you want to gamble that the 300+ million dollar contract you give out has a MAJORITY track record of not working out? Vegas would love a visit from you!
Not my money, so I don’t really care. Just an observation that the economics of the sport are skewed in favor of the owner and I disagree with the broad generalizations that long term mega deals NEVER work out. As a Sox fan I hope they back up the Brinks truck for Mookie because no matter what it’s going to cost me $100 a ticket and $12 a beer
That approach may work for you, and more power to ya if it does. But if prices get so high most fans can’t swing it … you can’t consume enough hot dogs and beer on your own to keep the franchise afloat.
You’re right to say it’s not your money, and that you don’t really care. So please tell us what you DO really care about, if it’s not too much trouble.
Thanks.
Any of the 35,000+ Red Sox fans that attend Fenway 81+ times a year are subject to these same costs, completely independent of the product on the field. Tickets and beer cost the same when they were in last place in 2015 as they did last year when they won 108 games. My point is I care about watching good baseball and if it takes massive contracts to make that happen then I’m fine with that.
As a Sox fan I would disagree on Manny….he eventually threw a fit and demanded a trade when he still had years remaining on his contract demanding his option years also get declined.
wasn’t that the last year though? They got a World Series and became a legit powerhouse as a result of signing manny. I’d say it worked out very well.
You are correct, Oxford. He got traded to the Dodgers in his last guaranteed year of the Red Sox deal. He had 2 option years, but they were declined and he re-signed with the Dodgers for a few million more.
A-Rods first deal played a role in the Rangers bankruptcy…
CursedRangers – BS. That’s like saying my hangnail played a role in my hospitalization after breaking 50 bones trying to jump the fountains at Caesars Palace, a la Evel Knievel.
The only reason the Rangers filed for bankruptcy was to make the sale of the club easier. Hicks had a debt of more than twice A-Rod’s entire contract with the team. The team wasn’t in financial trouble – Hicks was. He had a lot of investments outside of baseball, including losing money buying a soccer team in England then being forced to sell it for a loss, plus the big recession hit. The Rangers owed A-Rod $26 million at the time of the bankruptcy (2010) but that payout didn’t even start until 2016.. That deferred money also comes from a separate investment account that didn’t have squat to do with the Rangers’ operating expenses. It has never impacted the bottom line of the club.
As my post mentioned, ARod’s deal played a role in the Rangers bankruptcy. Hicks made a lot of financial blunders, ARoid’s contract was one of them. The Rangers were cash negative at the time of bankruptcy, receiving cash from MLB to stay afloat.
But Boras got paid his $25M for that contract…
Cant include deals that were made before steroid testing.
I don’t know any 10 year deals that worked. A-Rod first one worked because he was juicing..
and….. I want opt outs. Won’t sign a short term deal for the owners but he wants the opt out’s in place in case he does well and wants to turn it into a short term contract and reenter FA.l ol
I agree with you but I believe in the past they were paying for the player’s prime years. That used to be the cost for doing business, but they’ve wised up. The owners either need to pay a big AAV upfront with a smaller AAV in the declining years or they need to allow players to reach free agency earlier in their careers. That’s the only way we’ll see 10 year contracts IMO
I see a lot of people complaining that long term deals don’t work out but I don’t see anybody commenting on the monopoly teams have on these players before they reach fa or even arbitration. MiguelAndujar made peanuts for 6 years in the minor leagues Last year he had a great year and yet this year he’s earning 575,000 . So if players finally get a big paycheck after free agency consider how many players never get that big paycheck.If you want to get rid of long term contracts pay young players what they’re worth.People complaining about long term contracts can’t have it both ways.Players screwed through there first couple of years are just looking to even it up after years of being underpayed. Free agency is the only time they have any leverage. Look what happened with Matt Harvey.What happened to his big payday for what he did for the Mets.Oh thats right it never happened
I’m not defending the owners, but c’mon… In what world is $575,000 peanuts for a 23-year-old about to start his second MLB season?
In arbitration, when they make it, they instantly become millionaires. So they can’t get to free agency for awhile – they still get paid. Betts avoided arbitration this year and got $20 million. Arenado got $26 million. Even mediocre relief pitchers are getting $2 or $3 million.
There’s no way that he will get more than the Nats’ 10 year $300 million offer. He must not have wanted to return to DC, or Boars put into his head that he can get more on the open market, because he probably would have accepted the Nats deal if that weren’t the case.
Problem with Nats is they defer a ton of money. I still feel he’ll get 12/326 if a team feels he can help them make a run for the next 6-7 years. Plus, with in inflation, and a raise in payroll, a 30 million salary won’t be as big as an impact in 2025.
I can see the Phillies going 350.
Plus, I think Harper initially wanted a change of scenery. That being said, I think if that Nats offer is still on the table, he may take it.
I hope the Nats tell Boras the 10/300 offer expired. Best they will do now is 8/240 with opt out after 2
Uh huh, keep dreaming.
You guys talking out of your butts! You have no clue how much the Phillies have already offered him. No clue.
so hes saying he wouldnt take 2 years for 100 mill? what about 4 years 200 mill?
Fine. How about 100/$400m? That’s not a short-term deal and he gets the $400m he wanted.
Just front load it so that 99% of the contract is paid in the first 12 years.
Guess again
Lol If you do sign a player for more than 10 years might as well do it for 20/30 years. Make him coach if he can’t play… I mean is it that hard to coach first? Easier than third…
It’s incredibly hard.
First seems harder imo, working with a guy for stolen bases.
Sounds like the Bobby Bonilla Deal……LOL
Doesn’t it matter more what length of contract teams want to give?
He should have accepted the Nat’s offer. Hard to believe he and Boras expected more. Or maybe he doesn’t want to be a Nat.
I don’t think any baseball organization is going to offer Harper something that the Texas Rangers recklessly did with A-Rod those many years ago, and are still paying him! If Harper continues to balk on a short term deal – he may have to sit out baseball for a year.
The longer this plays out the more the value diminishes…is a Bryce Harper or any other player worth more in time by not playing? I doubt it…
Wait, the Rangers are still paying A-Rod from his 1st deal? You must be mistaken.
Sad, but true, the ARoid is still on the Rangers payroll.
Just one more year for the Rangers (2019 – 1 m). The Yankees are on the hook for him for 2019 (4m) and 2020 (5m).
That contract was actually worth it for the production ARod provided during those 10 years. The Rangers felt like they could win at the time. They were mistaken. It was his second contract with Yankees that became an albatross.
Tough to judge that contract knowing what we know about A-Rod’s steroid use.
Does it though? Steroids or not, he helped the team and he should’ve won the MVP (I’m speaking in the past tense here. Before all the accusations and positive tests) 2/3rds of the seasons he spent in Texas. Were those number aided by PED’s? Absolutely. However, those PED inflated numbers helped the team more during those years. Now remember, I’m saying it was ok that he did the roids. I’m saying that the seasons he spent in Texas were massively productive and basically worth the money.
Harper and Machado on opening day will be in the bleachers somewhere.
Sorry guys. you are not GOD
Boras probably thinks he is God.
Name a better agent
Weiserman Sports Group
They got Stanton a record setting contract. One in which an extension was reached, without the player being dragged through the media gauntlet. One in which false promises weren’t made. One in which doesn’t cast a shadow on the game. One in which the agent doesn’t get a ton of headlines.
And it looks like they are about to do something similar with Arenado.
Boras was incredible back in the day. His binders were supposedly full of all sorts of analytics. He was ‘in’ with several owners. But he has clearly misread the market for two years in a row. In fact you could argue he has cost his clients substantial income.
If he was the best of the best, he could have taken the Nationals original offer and negotiated another year or two. Or gotten a slightly higher annual payout. Yet he flat out rejected it.
I would say the Boras was the best for a good twenty year stretch. Now, my personal opinion, is his tactics have lost their impact. And no way should he be making 3 times as much as the highest paid player in the game.
“If he was the best of the best, he could have taken the Nationals original offer and negotiated another year or two. Or gotten a slightly higher annual payout. Yet he flat out rejected it.”
I think you’re confused about who actually makes the decisions here – Boras, or Harper.
The Nationals offer being rejected isn’t Boras’ decision – it’s Harper’s. Boras is the Agent, not the Client. Learn the difference.
Boras gives advice to his players. He misread the market and talked up the fact he’d get untold riches like no other player has ever seen. So Boras has to be held accountable at some point for leading the players he represents astray. Happened last year and look at his list of unsigned players this year. It’s all but a joke what is happening to those he is representing. Dallas wants close to $200M. Harper wants the moon. Boras has a responsibility to let his players know what the market looks like and to maximize that opportunity. So yes Boras is the agent. One who is getting paid three times what any player in baseball is. Three times more than Trout a year. For that type of money his players should be better represented. Mouskasis got jacked last year, and is getting jacked again this year. Boras played a role in getting his client a fraction of what he was worth.
— “Name a better agent” —
John Drake
In a sense you both are right. Harper makes the final decision, but based on Boras’ read. Like a lawyer and client. The client pays for advice. Boras said $400M and Harper is looking for that.
I hope the Phillies go somewhere else too. I don’t want him.
But Cam, don’t be difficult. We all know the difference.
I rewrote the title. “Bryce Harper not considering short term deals right now……but may eventually have to sign a short term contract because no team is going to give him a 10 year deal”
He’s signing with the Padres.
I hope your right ! Padres have been bad for a very long time with that said there doing things the right way now from building from within
I wonder if this has become all about ego and signing the biggest contract OF ALL TIME?
become?
it was all about that from the beginning. at least publicly.
Oh, Ok, thanks.
I don’t get out much.
Disabled…..
Yup, that’s true about Boras…
The bigger question is whose ego, Boras’s or Harpers. Considering the root cause is often linked to the same agent, it’s past head scratching that writers rarely call Boras to the carpet.
It’s interesting (for lack of a better word) that we get sometimes multiple updates daily on Harper but almost nothing regarding Machado
Ummm, mlbtraderumors.com/?s=machado
Hope you enjoyed the Boras Kool-Aid Bryce. Unfortunately it’s shelf life has long since expired and it’s a new world. God forbid you take $300m from your own team.
I don’t see what the issue is with the short term deal. He signs a 10-year deal, I guarantee he opts out after 4 years so that’s the same thing. The only thing that would keep him past those 4 years is a career altering injury.
Like how Heyward and Price were guaranteed to opt out?
If this FA market is proof of anything, it is that opt outs are not going to be that valuable to the players going forward.
It’s nice to know that you could opt out if you wanted to, even if you don’t want to. Who we KNOW opt-outs aren’t valuable to is the teams.
The team needs an opt out too…..
If they had that they would both be signed and at a record number
Well, where are you going to play then. The only teams that could interested are Philadelphia or Washington because I do not see any other team giving a contract more than 290 million.
Wished the cubs would jump in and sign him. Can’t imagine the market is still high. If they offered a 25MM 8 year-10 year deal think he might take it. No joke, but Bryce is one of most marketable baseball players worth at least 50MM over 10 years in that alone. I honestly side with owners on most things, but wish the Ricketts could make one last big purchase. Also, I haven’t seen cubs “resigning or paying their own guys” any contract extensions so why not get Bryce.
Because in a few years they WILL have to be “resigning or paying their own guys”.
Next headline: “Bryce Harper Fires Agent Scott Boras.”
Doesn’t matter, the market has been set and damage done.
Considering Boras would get paid $30 MILLION if Harper signs for $300M, I’m surprised that hasn’t happened yet.
Heck, I would have told Harper to sign the $300M offer from the Nationals and would have been doing cartwheels if I would have received $300k. Harper could have taken home another $3M annually rather than lining the pockets of his agent. Crazy absurd that someone can make that much money for negotiating a contract….
CursedRangers…where are you getting the $30M figure from. Granted the MLBPA does not restrict the % agents can make, unlike the NFL, MLB agent standard is 4-5% with some as low as 1.5%
Only if Bryce has an opt-out with Boras.
No short term deals?
Fine … then no player-only, unilateral opt-out clauses
Your move hot shot
He doesn’t want to sign a short-term deal because he knows that he’s been mostly slightly above average SOMEtimes and he doesn’t want teams to have an opt-out saying “you aren’t producing…we’re opting out.” He wants YEARS so that he can skate. Does that surprise anyone???
Sounds like Congress.
No player deserves to be paid 30 mil, ten years from now when they are -2 WAR players. Then again a MVP candidate that is earning 500k is equally abhorrent. Complicated problem.
That’s the crux of the problem. How much did Harper get paid for his MVP season? Owners don’t want to pay for declining production, but they’re happy to reap the benefits of pre-arb prime years from players. You can’t have it both ways. I think both players will end up with 7-8 year deals approaching 280mil. Not sure they’ll be ecstatic about it, but I think they’ll get paid enough to stop with the “sky is falling” rhetoric.
MVP should get $10M bonus.
It’s a team game. However it would be a cool idea to take some of the revenue sharing proceeds and payout players who win awards. Would give a chance to players, with limited service time, to make a fairer payday.
I like the idea, but it’s tough to tell owners they just have to shell out money if a player had a great individual season. I think the main problem is there are only around 10 teams that have the budget to compete every year. Of those 10 teams, 3-4 are in ”rebuilding” mode any given year. So 5-6 teams know they are bidding against each other for top free agents. Why go beyond your comfort zone when you know other teams won’t be able to bid for whichever players aren’t signed by your main competition? You can just sit, and wait for the price to come down. Revenue sharing and tv money was supposed to fix competitive balance, but it’s basically just juiced it for the teams at the top, and the teams at the bottom. Shorter contracts for veterans, higher minimum contracts for all players, and players reaching free agency sooner might help to some extent, but what on earth do you do with the Marlins, A’s, Rays, etc? The fact that those teams are ever competitive with their budgets kind of points to the biggest problem being service time and when young players reach free agency.
Ok than give every player in the league based minimum pay. All players are paid based on performance. Use war. Highest war player makes highest salary. Perfect system
It would be great if no one signs Harper because he holds onto to this huge contract length and demand into the season. I guarantee he tries to sue or files a grievance with the union because he didn’t get what HE wanted.
The contract situation must change. To many opportunities for small market clubs to be completely disabled due to salary hits for less productive players.
Sue for what? Teams don’t HAVE to pay him anything.
Nor should he have to consider it. A young player in their prime with a good resume play should worthy of a lengthy and hefty price tag. Teams aren’t being saavy their playing it off as the players want to much when in fact they could fill your house with the cash they have.
Lengthy contracts will destroy baseball teams when players can’t perform in the last 3-5 years. If owners push back on the Machado and Harper camps now, baseball will be better in the future. Any contract for more than 5 years is plain stupid. Now is the time to get greedy players and agents in line. The only solution is contract options. If a player performs to the expectation of what he is being paid, then the contract should continue. If he doesn’t then it ends. Why should all the risk be on the owners and fans who will have to put up with non-performers. A five year $100 million+ contract is not being unreasonable.
The league won’t just get away with that. With spending being limited in the draft and the international market and no FA spending drying up it will get to a point where the players will say enough is enough. You call the agents and players greedy and that paying older players for too many years is bad yet you ignore how cost controlled the players are with arbitration.
You can’t have it both ways where you don’t want to pay players for their most productive years and then don’t want to pay them after that. This is going to end in a strike and changes in the way things opperate.
What’s more likely to be replaced easier, players or team owners?
There’s always someone else who will do it better for cheaper.
I think that there will always be a limit to how much the owners can make compared to the players and vise versa. You see this in every sport. Don’t forget how badly the last strike hurt the league.
They’re are better players out there right now that can take over Trout, Betts, Arenado, Sale, Scherzer, Judge, Kluber, Lindor, Ramirez, Acuña, and the guys coming up like Vlad Jr???? Where are you watching baseball?? Minor leaguers won’t cross the picket line, maybe the lifers who never made it, but definitely not the top guys who the MLBPA will represent in a short time. You’ll definitely find cheaper. But it won’t be better.
This isn’t your average blue collar construction job. There aren’t players who can do it better.
The players union should consider capping the percentages that agents can take from players. No agent deserves $30M from signing one contract. No agent deserves to make more annually than half of the team’s payrolls.
I’ve said that since this started.
If Trout had signed a 12 year deal instead of that 6 year deal, I think the Angels would get there money’s worth. Not all contracts longer than 7 years are horrible. But you really have to be smart with who you’re giving it to.
The market was misread. The NYY have their positions filled, as do the Dodgers, and Boston. The Cubs and Giants are at the cap. The teams that are left simply don’t have the resources to make $35mm/year on a single player a smart allocation. Who did they see bidding on their services? If a team is budgeting “only” $150-200mm on payroll, how do you rationalize giving up to 1/5th of that to one player?
I am just ready for the offseason to end and actual baseball to start. This Machado/Harper saga has gone on so long I just roll my eyes when I see a story mentioning them.
I’m with you.
There’s a good chance that either or both will be sitting out some or all of 2019, and the game of baseball will be just fine. The only ones losing sleep over it will be Harper and Machado. Life goes on for the rest of us living in the real world.
Giants ownerships could overrule Zaidi on the contract length. The trial balloon of a high AAV shorter deal does sound like it popped.
I agree, but that goes for all the other teams in the chase, as well.
I’m pretty sure baseball’s going to start this season without either of them on a roster.
Team refuses to overspend = “They’re greedy! Players deserve that money!”
Player refuses to take a smaller deal = “They’re greedy! Teams are to smart to pay that!”
Okay, but how many player opt outs will there be lol… 2 or 3?
Phillies will sign Harper…book it.
Sounds like Harper should have taken the 10/300….although if I’m Harper, there is something to be said about a 2/75-80 deal and then try for a 5 or 6/180ish at age 28.
Well that’s not going to happen in SF. He has hit horribly at their ballpark. If you take a shorter
Term deal, you better be hitting/boosting stats when your asking for that kinda money he is. Talk about a way to devalue yourself. SF is out, period. Down to Nats and Phillies. I’m Biased so I I’ll say Philly wins this.
National reporters disagree with you that the Giants are out and that the Nats are still in. And why even mention the small sample in SF? And anyway, a player of Harper’s caliber is going to produce anywhere he hits, even if production would be higher in other parks.
I wouldn’t be surprised if some team offers 350 for 8-10.
I’m also curious if the Nats offer is still on the table.
not likely
I’d love to see some Korean or Japanese team swoop in and sign him for the money he wants. Welcome to the Yomiuri Giants, Bryce Harper!!!
Might be a leap to go from <5M per year to a 30M per year player in the Japanese league lol.
Maybe! Maybe the league takes off and becomes relevant!!
The longer that this goes on, the more I believe that Harper will again a National.
*be
Nice to see Heyman hyping up the market for a Boras guy. That never happens ha ha.
It’s head scratching how national writers never criticize Boras. It’s also head scratching how they hype the market for Boras. Heyman is the worst. Wouldn’t be surprised to find out one day that Heyman is getting compensated by someone linked to Boras. Not saying it’s happening. Just wouldn’t surprise me.
Most free agents want to get paid based on what they have done. Harper wants to get paid based on what he might do.
Three times in the last in the last four years his war has been under two.
Poor guy threw a party and nobody showed up.
Want your job as Twins GM back? I’m not liking these new guys as much as I though I would.
The comments of Harper or Machado being unemployed when the season starts is laughable. Deals will get done, whether in favor of the ownership or these players. I can easily see a 10 year deal being signed. These two aren’t like Pujols who was past his prime when with the Angels. These two would be in their mid-30s at contracts end. Also, in 10 years a $30m valuation may be a steal. We won’t know that. But while I can see a 10 year deal I don’t believe it would be for $300m. At least not for Harper who, aside fro one stellar season, has largely bean a disappointment. One of the preeminent sluggers of today yet had one 100 RBI season. Give him 10/250 with reasonable opt outs for both sides and wrap this up.
Makes sense… if he wants to test free agency again he can ask for an opt out 2-3 years from now and have guaranteed contract to fall back on if he doesn’t choose to opt out.
He has to be catching heat from his wife right now. No money no honey.
He better get used to eating beans and rice and rice and beans.
Like most of the rest of the planet?
He’s not worth a 10 year contract. The maximum would be five years.
Washington has 3 pretty good outfielders in Eaton, Robles & Soto and 2 pretty good back ups in Taylor and Kendricks. If they signed Bryce they would have had to trade either Eaton or Robles and now they don’t have the offseason to make that trade.
So if I’m Washington I pull the deal off the table. I think Harper signs 3/105 with a reasonable opt in. That way he’s potentially a free agent the year the CBA is ironed out and he has the Mike Trout contact as a point of reference.
But if that’s the case San Francisco is is likely out. If Trout bats .249 in Washington he possibly hits .229 in in San Francisco where I believe he has his worst lifetime batting average of all NL ballparks.
On a shorter term deal Harper has to go to an offensive ballpark like Philly on a deal with an opt out or opt in.
That’s my 2 cents.
How much of an impact to season ticket sales, if a team signs a stud player this late?
This is what happens when the media overhypes, over-worships a player who is just a good player….. not the second coming they claim him to be. IMO the media hype of these players hitting free agency the last 2 years is as much to blame as the owners for being “cheap” (despite payrolls never being higher) and the players thinking they’re worth more than they actually are….. because of the media hype. Also, any baseball player thinking a 10 year deal is feasible or smart are only looking out for themselves, which I don’t have a problem with, but they do so at the expense of logic. IMO owners are just wising up. For DECADES teams overpaid for veterans hitting free agency. Giving them ridiculous AAVs for way to long of contracts. I’d say 7…. maybe 8 years is the best a player can hope for in terms of a contract, and IMO that’s VERY reasonable. That’s like half a career’s worth of playing time on one deal. And half a career for a player who plays for a LOOONG time. The average….. AVERAGE MLB career isn’t even 6 years. Players thinking they can get almost twice that in a single contract is insane. Even the greatest players only usually have 16-18 year careers…… and those last 2-4 years are pretty mediocre. The fact that Harper has had 2 mediocre (at best) seasons out of the last 3 really makes it hard to say he’s worth a long term commitment if he’s already posting seasons of .240s BAs and only hits like 25-30 HRs. Those are solid HR totals….. but hardly crazy. If he was a perennial 40 HR hitter….. his case would be stronger, but averaging out his last 3 years he’s been about a .265 hitter with a .390ish OBP and hits about 28 HRs……. with HORRIBLE defense in the field. Why people don’t talk about the latter is beyond me, especially seeing as people ONLY talk about that when talking about Schwarber – how he’s only DH-worthy because of his fielding. Well I’d hate to bring people back to reality from the clouds their heads are floating in, but Schwarber had significantly better defensive metrics than Harper last year. Yet Schwarber narrative is… “He’s only DH-worthy”…… Harper narrative “HE’S A GENERATIONAL PLAYER…… ONCE IN A LIFETIME!!!!” *just don’t look at that .265ish BA the last 3 years…. and the good but not great 25-30 HRs/year……. and less than mediocre fielding*
IMO….. I think a more realistic figure for Harper ENTERING the offseason would’ve been 7 year for $170M. That’s about $24.25M AAV. Not bad for a .265 hitter with, let’s give him, 30 HRs and mediocre at best fielding abilities…. which is also giving him a benefit of the doubt in regards to his fielding calling it “mediocre”…. again, it’s more like “mediocre at best…… if not downright below average.” Yes…. he won an MVP, what, 4 years ago now. Why would any sensible team pay for something that happened almost half a decade ago. 7 years $170M or 6 for $156 is what I would offer him…. and IMO that’s more than fair. He’d be in his early 30s when he’d hit free agency and if he’s as good as he thinks he is he could still sign another 9 figure deal when he hits free agency again. But if he were to sign a 12 year deal that team is taking on a MASSIVE risk. 1) what is his production the last 3 years IS his norm. That’s not worth a 12 year deal and DEFINITELY not worth the $30+M AAV he and the media thinks/thought he was worth. Or, more likely, what happens if he pulls a Carl Crawford after signing his big deal, and suddenly gets injured every year and when healthy is just…. meh. Or Albert Pujols….. or pretty much every other player who’s signed a deal for 8+ years. If/When that happens, the same media saying the player is worth every penny of the deal initially will then be saying how stupid the team was for signing said player for such a large sum of money for so long when that player’s salary buries the team from making further moves down the line, or prevents the team from retaining younger (better?) talent. People like to say the owners are greedy. The players are just as greedy. If they were “all about the game and winning” a 6-7 year deal worthy $156-170M would be MORE than enough to PLAY A FRIGGIN GAME for a living.
Bottom line….. whoever signs Harper and Machado I think will be regretting it about 3-4 years into the deal…… assuming they sign fairly long deals (anything 6 years or longer). And assuming they get $25+M AAV. Look at Giancarlo Stanton. The dude for the next NINE years is going to average about $29M/season. He’s a .260-.270 hitter with an OBP in the .340-.355 range and hit about 35-40 HRs. Not bad by any means, but “great.” Almost $30M AAV great? I don’t think so. Last year Stanton hit .266 with a .343 OBP and a .852 OPS….. and is mediocre in the field….. Is that really worth that much money? Harper doesn’t have as much power but gets on base more than Stanton. Both hit about the same. Harper’s worse in the field. How is he worth as much if not more than Stanton? Oh yeah…. and Harper is injury prone ALREADY. He has only 2 of his 7 seasons in which he player 150+ games. 4 seasons in which he didn’t even play 140 games. And yet Harper, his agent, and the dumb media are baffled as to why teams aren’t throwing money at this guy. Seems pretty obvious as to why to me.
Too many words….did not read.
For starters Harper typically tends to be close to OR OVER .400 OBP wise right? Even last season when he didn’t get as many hits. Do you even know what you are talking about? Perhaps not?
“War and Peace” comes to mind..
KB’s Kampf.
Look at the Tigers. Cabrera will get $30Mil in 2019, 2020 & 2021 then $32Mil for the next 2 years then the next 2 years have vesting options at another $30Mil. The Tigers are paying Houston $8Mil for Verlander to pitch for them & another $6Mil to Texas for Fielder who has been retired for years. They also owe Zimmerman $25Mil for this year. Cabrera has been Great but look at how much time he has been off the team injured. Verlander was Injured for quite a while too. And Zimmerman? Then there was the signing of Closer Joe Nathen, that one flopped too.
I think that 10 years for Harper or Machado will be a disaster. Contracts like those take years to recover from if they wind up injured or just plain flop.
My personal opinion puts Harper at 5 Years 20 – 25Mil Per Year.
Machado I give more, 8 Years 30Mil Per Year.
I liked what you had to say KB.
Three questions for commenters:
1. Why would we care how much a player gets–we would want the best pay we could get in any job we applied for.
2. Why have sympathy for the owners, of all people? It’s an incredibly profitable business–and they are getting taxpayer (meaning, “our money’) subsidies..
3. Harper and Machado are top tier free agents with a reasonable expectation of playing well for close to a decade. What’s the incentive for them to take a short-term contract and risk injury? Why shouldn’t they go long? Maybe 10 is too much, but can anyone honestly say they are sure that a 33 year old Harper won’t be able to hit?
1. Many teams have younger talent coming up that won’t require a $30M/yr. investment and if they had that $30M/yr. albatross, it would leave them with less money to invest in more players. Mike Trout is no doubt the best player in baseball, has that helped the Angels make the playoffs? No, so a team like the Braves getting either Harper or Machado is not worth the risk of locking themselves into a long term contract.
2. This is a liberal view on Teams’ owners. Of course the teams receive subsidies, but the cities/counties that give those subsidies also receive tons of tax revenue, which work out for the city/county.
3. It’s hard for me to feel for Harper when he turned down a $300M contract with the team that drafted him. Machado, he did this to himself with his on field and off field antics. Both will get large contracts, but I couldn’t care less where they go and when they go.
Regarding 2, the academic work done on taxpayer subsidies is generally not favorable, and that’s a conclusion generally shared pretty much across the board, and not merely by “liberal” evaluators. You think the taxpayers in Miami are happy?
3: I don’t feel for Harper in the least–he’s a talent looking to get paid, like you or I would be. He’s not entitled to anything. But I don’t blame him for trying
1. Personally, I prefer to see younger talent making its way up…it’s far more exciting to watch breakthroughs by rookies. I wouldn’t expect Atlanta to spring for that type of money. Teams need to work within a budget,
Regarding 2, the academic work done on taxpayer subsidies is generally not favorable- This is coming from a guy living in Cobb County, and see the subsidies as a good thing in THIS case. Miami is a mess from every standpoint.
3: I don’t feel for Harper in the least–he’s a talent looking to get paid, like you or I would be. He’s not entitled to anything. But I don’t blame him for trying- Agreed, but when you turn down a $300M contract, you are sending a message to other teams that you are aiming for the moon and will take nothing but.
1. Personally, I prefer to see younger talent making its way up…it’s far more exciting to watch breakthroughs by rookies. I wouldn’t expect Atlanta to spring for that type of money. Teams need to work within a budget,- Agreed
Japan.
This is something to get the giants to bump up their years. I think they’ll eventually throw in a few more years for him. If they don’t, then he’ll end up in philly.
I don’t even think Philadelphia is offering a long term deal or he would’ve signed.
My offer to Harper, regardless the team…..
2019-2021 9 million per.
2022 320 million
2023-27 9 million per
2028 8 million
10 years 400 million. 80 percent being paid in the year that won’t be played because of the strike.
The days of contracts longer than 5 years in any sport are over. The days of agents controlling the sport are also over. Sports viewership is on the decline in all areas in North America. If you looked at the demographics, it is the people born in the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s that are keeping these overpaid, egotistical athletes in business. Younger generations are just not interested. It is about time people realized it. As a Canadian, I am shocked by how uninterested younger people are in hockey, something that every Canadian used to be consumed by. Even though I can afford it, I no longer go to hockey games and pay $14.00 for a beer, etc. Let some other sucker do it. They day they go to pay per view games is the day I stop watching. I no longer purchase the NFL package as I have lost interest, as have most of my buddies. These times, they are a changing……………!
Yep. I see it in Canada too.
Hockey is also getting, to some extent, the blowback Americans get with Football where you can get hurt playing these sports. Yet nobody says a word about Lacrosse in Canada.
We also have to account for the changing demographics in Canada. Many first and second generation Canadians aren’t into hockey.
i could see NHL still handing out longer term deals. hockey players seem to be pretty reliable in terms of predicting future performance based on past performance…for whatever reason.
They still do, for players that were drafted by the same team (Stamkos, Price, McDavid, Eichel, etc.)
I think in sports in general, it’s the best way to hand out long term deals to players already in the system since there are a lot of intangibles known with the player in the environment. It is also a way to pay them as a thank you note for the production on their entry-level deals.
I would be reluctant to sign Manny or Bryce to more than 7 years. I think Bryce would only get a long-term deal from Washington.
If the Tokyo Giants offer Bryce 12-years $375-mil, should he take it?
Yes. It’s all about the money, right?
At this point, yes. Lifetime financial security.
The very iconic movie top gun. I’m going to quote a line. Harper‘s ego writes checks his body can’t cash
I hope Harper winds up sitting out the whole season. This guy is self-centered and is far from a proven winner. Sick of writers fawning all over this guy. He’s a punk and overrated. Rot in Vegas waiting for your $300 million deal, Bryce. Lolol
Sounds like something I would’ve said. Love your style of thinking. He is a punk thinking of only himself.
He won’t see $300M on a contract.
Problem is a owner who couldn’t manage his finances gave out a 325m contract.Funny that Arrieta was a guy complaining about the market,probably because he couldn’t get the 5,6,7 year guarantee he wanted.Paid like a All star,performed like an average pitcher,in year 1.Middle relievers getting paid 8,9,10+ million.Writers and fans predicting deals that would shatter the record 325 million that the out of business owner gave out.To many people who don’t know a thing about dealing with Millions of dollars,have put their 2 cents into the conversation about handling hundreds of millions,thats what’s wrong with the market.
I still think the Yankees come in at 7/225. And front load it heavily. That way when Judge, Sevy, Sanchez and Torres start needing extensions Harper is down around 20 mill a season or less. That’s the way to go if u have some pre arb good players.
And he would turn it down, it just said he’s not looking for short term deals.
Maybe we’ll find out after he talks to Ted Lerner on the phone today?
There are never a lot of teams in on the bidding on the top free agents. The Nats offered Harper 10 years, 300 mil. Are you going to put into the CBA that every team has to offer 14 years, 425 mil to the top free agents? A salary floor covers 1 year, not 10 year contracts.
I say Manny will sign a contract before Harper.
I’ve lost sympathy for Harper’s situation, as sympathetic as I can be when hundreds of millions of dollars are involved. The market Harper is seeking is pure fiction – why not sign a shorter term deal with opt-outs? I can only assume teams are likewise losing interest.
Harper + Giants = bad fit
He blew it by rejecting that 10yr $300mil deal the Nats offered earlier (if it was indeed accurate).
Again, Both will go where they get the best deal..no clue where..I still think we might be surprised
Nobody quite understands what this contract means to Boras. Trout’s agent, Craig Landis, is a very good friend of mine. From the time Trout and Harper reached the bigs he’s taken the comparison of the two very personally. In fact, when Craig and Trout renegotiated his Angels contract Boras made it very clear that he believed they screwed up Harper’s market. Clearly Boras is concerned Harper is losing ground to Trout and that Trout’s eventual contract will dwarf his. Make no mistake, he’s going to fight tooth and nail to wring every drop out of this contract. By the way, Landis, Trout and his family are all class acts.
Harper is a good player with one great year.
Trout is an all-time great player so far.
They’re not really even comparable, and Boras is attempting to commit fraud by merely comparing them.
So much of this could play out to be so interesting. Right off the bat, of course, I wonder where Harper draws the line – what does he consider “short term?” Anything under ten years? Five?
And what would he do if nobody decides to pony up ten/five/whatever-the-number-is years at a $30M (plus?) AAV? Would he refuse to sign until he gets what he wants? What if he misses a whole season? How does that affect his signability/desireability?
Won’t sign a short term deal but I bet he demands n opt out after 2 or 3 years
The absolute best either one is going to see is going to look like 8 years 260M with player opt outs at years 3 and 6, team opt outs with buy out after year 5 and 7. In my opinion, that is WAY too generous, but I think that is what will get it done.
megaj. You made that up. What are the offers?
I guess dude doesn’t realize teams aren’t willing to pay what he wants. Have fun being a free agent till you get off your demands
Looks like the $$$millions per projected WAR over long term contracts is being recalibrated. Players and their agents are going to have to adjust to the new normal whether they like it or not.
Knowing the agent, Harper will want it all his way. He still wants a guaranteed 10 year deal, with opt outs after 2, 5 and 7 years.
Odd that he came out and said this….Boras was clearly trying to use the Giants and Padres as leverage.
Basically he was telling the Phillies, “hey, sure, your offer is better than theirs but if we do something stupid and sign with them, you are in a bad spot, so you better start negotiating against yourself.”
If I’m the Phillies I tell Boras “Nope. This is our final offer.” And put a 24-hour deadline on it.
I don’t think any team has offered what he’s looking for. Not even the Phillies, shoot, has there been a report of an offer from any team yet? Reports state the Giants were putting something together, possibly a short term deal, but who actually knows, along with Philadelphia. Obviously a team has yet to make a long term deal, my bet it circles back to the Nats and he signs with them.
If I was the A’s owner I give him 10 for 350 ASAP. They could use a marketable face of the franchise. Would help them get that new stadium and he would fit right in with that young team.
6 years used to be a long term contract, but now free agents act like it’s nothing. There have actually only been 11 contracts of 10 years in MLB history, including Wayne Garland, who signed for 10 years and under 3 million total. Many of those others have been players like Braun, Tulu, and Elvis Andrus signing relatively team friendly (vs. market projections) extensions with their current teams. This sudden expectation that a guy like Harper, who has 1 MVP an no other top 10 MVP finishes is entitled to 10 years is simply unrealistic
Where does this reporter get this from? Who’s his source? The market is going to pay what the market is willing to pay or he’s not going to play. Better take the best deal out there!
Jon Heyman’s source is apparently Scott Boras himself. Or at least that is what is rumored. So if true, it would be right from the horses mouth.
I believe that is a rumor or he would say that. No? Crap who knows. Who knows if the Giants or Phillies even made an offer at all right? I mean, I heard that Boras flew back to S.F to negotiate a deal. That’s all I’ve heard. And what’s the meaning of short deal? 2 to 4 year deal? What’s long term? 5-8 years? This is some crazy rumors
He would never acknowledge his source, no writer would, especially if it does come from and agent our team.
If Heyman came out and said “Scott told me that Harper will not accept a short term deal” it would be in violation of the CBA, as contracts cannot be negotiated in the media.
This is why no one really knows what offers Bryce or Manny have received for sure. For all we know either one could have a $330 offer on the table right now. Anyone who says otherwise is full of it as no one here knows for sure.
Good point
The headline should probably read “Boras not considering any short-term deals” because his ego is on the line and he very likely told Harper he was certain to set a record with his new deal.
Wondering what purpose Boras has in making this statement.
Royals ought to offer him a minor league deal. Or see what Baltimore could do. Let’s get on with Spring Training and forget about these crybaby clowns.
The rangers should just swoop in and offer a 5 billion dollar lifetime deal with a full no trade clause and 1mill for anytime his name is mentioned in the same sentence as Lou Gehrig. Let’s end this!
Mets should offer him the 10 years he wants and a chance to beat Stanton’s contract. 10yrs/$230M base + incentives with no opt outs. $20M for 1500 games played, $20M for 2000 hits, $20M for 400 HRs, $20M for 1200 RBIs, and $2M for every MVP he gets. But knowing the Wilponzis, they probably want him at the qualifying offer price.
I don’t know if you’re trying to be funny with all the bonuses, but i think this is one of the smartest proposals i’ve seen in regards to BH. He believes he is one of the best, if not the best, in the game right now. He’s a generational talent, right? Those bonus activating stats have HOF written all over them. You want the biggest contract ever in baseball? Then come and get it, just be prepared to have to put up these numbers.
I’ve been posting this idea for months lol
Here’s a fat base for what you’ve done so far and here’s what we’ll pay for what you do for us going forward
Can’t be done – the MLB Basic Agreement prohibits statistical performance incentives in contracts.
That settles that.
Harper should retire now just to make a point.
I don’t know what point that would be exactly,
but I’m behind him 100%.
Heh. I have nothing against the guy, really. I hope he gets paid well and plays well for his eventual team.
What’s everyone going to do with themselves when these two clowns sign their contracts?
Harper’s decision not to sign a short-term deal really makes his negotiating plans interesting in the sense that this looks like an eBay auction. Interested teams are looking to swoop up at the very last moment for the least amount of money and years. As a Nationals fan, I wouldn’t mind if the Marlins were ready to hit “buy it now.”
If I had $300-$350M to spend on a player over 10 years, Bryce would be my guy. That said, I’m really surprised at this story. While nobody wants to have a shorter contract, Harper is exactly the kind of guy that I can see saying, “I’ll bet on myself”. Take a shorter, higher AAV deal and re-enter FA in 2-3 years.
The primary reason for him not doing it (speculation on my part) is the general trend of the market AND the upcoming CBA. Don’t want to be without a contract in the case of a strike or if the next CBA is a dog for players.
You’re only 26 once. His value will never be higher than it is right now, so a short contract could cost him millions in the long run. Especially if his performance falls off the table at 30.
A players contract is still valid, even if there is a strike or a new CBA. It is written unto the contract. If you get injured, you get paid.
He is possibly considering a long term home, on the west coast. Maybe he doesn’t like to be a FA.
Last, maybe he realizes 2018 was an indicator of things to come. He wants the security of not relying on his performance to sign his next agreement in 3 years.
Have fun on the unemployment line!! When will people learn; these contracts don’t work!!
So what he is saying it’s all about the money, and he turned down $300 million from the Nationals?, stupid.
All mlb treats at aligning for a run at trout once he signs a more lucrative deal may be available for Harper.
Like shoulder-to-shoulder fisherman all along the banks on opening day of trout season.
trout with angels or phillies
Duh he isn’t taking a short term deal lol
Harper and Machado will scream to their Union—C-O-L-L-U-S-I-O-N I call it the Pujos Effect. The other owners see how Moreno is handcuffed with Pujos’ 10 year contract.
Good point.
No one give ms 2 squirts of p*ss where he goes. Nike. Jusf go somewhere. Take a year. Off. This is getting ridiculous
Don’t drink and post.
Posting blind not drunk. No glasses on. Just woke up
You know what? I hear that. I’m useless without my specs too.
Huh? … What’s that you say, sonny?
Toronto is going to sign this guy. Convince me otherwise
Toronto is not going to sign this guy.
You’re welcome.
He’s going to be the first cover athlete of MLB the show on PS4 without a team unless he gets realistic
I like Harper but when it comes to professional sports. I’m on the owners side of things, for the most part. Professional sports these days are out of hand. Players are softer, not as competitive, and way over paid. Harper like Machado wants a record breaking deal. If a team wants to pay them that record breaking money let them but it makes no sense. The owners have the power. If the owners dont pay that crazy money, players will be forced to take less or not play. Remember, players come and go but owners and organization almost always remain. God forbid, Harper got hurt and his career was over. MLB, would just find another player to fill his spot.
Players work for the owners and fans. Its not the other way around. Imagine if the players took less money too play a sport kids are playing for free everyday. Ticket prices and the basic cost to take our youth to the game would go down and make it easier to promote the sport in areas such as the inner cities where it is basically nonexistent. The sport would grow in the minority communities, unlike what it is now.
Can Bryce Harper just go play in Japan, already. No one is giving you that kind of money for those kind of years, “brah.”
Who cares. Just sign somewhere you overrated prima donna.
Any player that rejects a 10/300 million offer from the team that developed you into the player you are should have go sit in the corner with a duntz hat on to think about just how idiotic you could possibly be